Editorial Policy

Peer-reviewed articles are vital to the advancement of structured, credible, and high-quality academic knowledge. Kertas of Management and Social Science (KMSS) upholds rigorous peer-review standards to ensure the integrity and scholarly contribution of all published work.

KMSS uses a single-blind peer review process, where the reviewers' identities are kept anonymous, but the authors' identities are visible to the reviewers.

Initial Editorial Screening

All manuscripts undergo an initial evaluation by the Editor-in-Chief or designated Section Editors to determine their suitability for the journal in terms of:

Scope and alignment with KMSS themes
Originality and novelty
Compliance with submission guidelines and formatting requirements

Manuscripts that pass this preliminary check are forwarded for peer review.

Peer Review Process

Each manuscript is typically reviewed by at least two independent expert reviewers. Reviewers are selected based on their subject-matter expertise and familiarity with the manuscript's content area.

Reviewers are asked to assess the manuscript based on the following criteria:

Originality: Novel contributions to the field
Significance: Valid and meaningful interpretations with justified conclusions
Structure and Format: Compliance with KMSS author guidelines
Relevance: Appropriateness and value to KMSS readership
Language Quality: Clear and scholarly use of English
Overall Merit: Scientific rigor and academic contribution

The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for the final decision regarding publication. Editors recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where a conflict of interest exists (e.g., co-authored work, family members, institutional affiliations, or commercial interest). Such manuscripts are handled independently by an unbiased editorial representative.

Review Outcomes

After peer review, the Editor-in-Chief may issue one of the following decisions:

Accept as is: The manuscript requires no revisions (rare).
Accept with minor revisions: Small editorial or structural improvements are requested.
Accept after major revisions: Substantive modifications needed in methodology, analysis, or structure.
Revise and resubmit: A substantially improved version may be reconsidered in a future round.
Reject: The manuscript is declined due to major flaws, lack of originality, or irrelevance to KMSS.

Reviewer comments are edited by the editorial team if necessary to remove inappropriate tone or confidential content. Any sensitive feedback intended only for editors is kept in the confidential section of the review form.

Editorial Discretion

Editors or Editorial Board members may serve as reviewers for submissions within their domain of expertise, provided there are no conflicts of interest.
The Editor-in-Chief may seek additional expert input as needed.
Final decisions are based on the reviewers' reports, author revisions, and the manuscript's contribution to the field.